55284 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 320.22 Notice of hearing. 

(a) Notification of parties. At the 

discretion of the hearings officer, any 

hearing required under this part may be 

held in person, by telephone conference 

call, or by video teleconferencing as 

described in § 320.25(d). * * * 

* * * * * 

(c) Ruling on objection. The hearings 

officer shall rule on any objection timely 

filed by a party under this section and 

shall notify the party of his or her ruling 

thereon. The hearings officer may for 

good cause shown, or upon his or her 

own motion, reschedule the time and/or 

place of the hearing. If an individual 

objects to having a hearing by video 

teleconferencing, the hearings officer 

will find the individual’s wish not to 

appear by video teleconferencing to be 

a good reason for changing the time or 

place of the scheduled hearing and will 

reschedule the hearing for a time or 

place where a telephone conference call 

or an in person hearing will be held. 

The hearings officer also may limit or 

expand the issues to be resolved at the 

hearing. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Revise § 320.25(d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 320.25 Hearing of appeal. 

* * * * * 

(d) Hearing by telephone or video 

teleconferencing. As stated in 

§ 320.22(a), at the discretion of the 

hearings officer, any hearing required 

under this part may be conducted in 

person, by telephone conference call, or 

by video teleconferencing. The hearings 

officer may determine the hearing 

should be conducted by telephone 

conference call or video 

teleconferencing if use of these methods 

would be more efficient than 

conducting an in person hearing and the 

hearings officer does not determine that 

there is a circumstance in the particular 

case preventing the use of these 

methodologies to conduct the hearing. 

By Authority of the Board. 

Dated: September 6, 2006. 

Beatrice Ezerski, 

Secretary to the Board. 

[FR Doc. 06–8058 Filed 9–21–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7905–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2006–0210; FRL–8220–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plans; Utah; Revised 

Definitions of Volatile Organic 

Compounds and Clearing Index; Direct 

Final Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action approving State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the 

State of Utah on November 11 and 

November 23, 2005. The revisions are to 

the Utah Administrative Code (UAC) 

rule R307–101–2 and (1) incorporate by 

reference the federal definition of 

‘‘Volatile Organic Compounds’’ (VOC), 

and (2) update the definition of 

‘‘Clearing Index’’. The intended effect of 

this action is to make federally 

enforceable these revised definitions to 

the Utah SIP. This action is being taken 

under section 110 of the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 21, 2006 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by October 23, 2006. If 

adverse comment is received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–

OAR–2006–0210, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: long.richard@epa.gov and 

mastrangelo.domenico@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Richard R. Long, Director, Air 

and Radiation Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, 999 18th Street, Suite 

200, Denver, Colorado 80202–2466. 

• Hand Delivery: Richard R. Long, 

Director, Air and Radiation Program, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 999 

18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 

80202–2466. Such deliveries are only 

accepted Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. 

to 4:55 p.m., excluding Federal 

holidays. Special arrangements should 

be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2006–

0210. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA, without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I. 

General Information of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air and Radiation Program, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 

300, Denver, Colorado 80202–2466. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the individual listed in the FOR


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES_1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 55285 

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

view the hard copy of the docket. You 

may view the hard copy of the docket 

Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 

p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Domenico Mastrangelo, Air and 

Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P–AR, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 

200, Denver, Colorado 80202–2466, 

(303) 312–6436, 

mastrangelo.domenico@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. What is the Purpose of This Action? 

III. What is the State Process to Submit These 

Materials to EPA? 

IV. EPA’s Review of the State of Utah’s 

November 11 and November 25, 2005 

Submittals 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA 

mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, 

unless the context indicates otherwise. 

(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our 

mean or refer to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

(iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to 

State Implementation Plan. 

(iv) The words State or Utah mean the 

State of Utah, unless the context 

indicates otherwise. 

I. General Information 

A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through http:// 

regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

a. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

b. Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

c. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

d. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

e. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

f. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

g. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

h. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. What is the Purpose of This Action? 

EPA is approving revisions to the 

definitions of Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) and Clearing Index 

in Utah’s rule R307–101–2. On 

November 11, 2005, the State of Utah 

submitted revisions to the definition of 

VOC. The revised VOC definition 

incorporates by reference 40 CFR 

51.100(s). On November 23, 2005, the 

State of Utah submitted a revised 

definition of the Clearing Index. The 

revised definition of the Clearing Index 

reflects a more specific and expanded 

clearing index forecast generated by the 

National Weather Service (NWS). 

III. What is the State Process to Submit 

These Materials to EPA? 

Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses 

our actions on submissions of revisions 

to a SIP. The CAA requires States to 

observe certain procedural requirements 

in developing SIP revisions for 

submittal to us. Section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA requires that each SIP revision be 

adopted after reasonable notice and 

public hearing. This must occur prior to 

the revision being submitted by a State 

to us. 

The Utah Air Quality Board (UAQB) 

held a public hearing for the revised 

definition of VOC on May 24, 2005. The 

definition was adopted by the UAQB on 

July 6, 2005 and became State effective 

on July 7, 2005. The UAQB held a 

public hearing for the revised definition 

of Clearing Index on July 19, 2005. The 

definition was adopted by the UAQB on 

September 7, 2005 and became State 

effective on September 8, 2005. The 

Governor submitted these SIP revisions 

to us on November 11 and November 

23, 2005 respectively. 

We have evaluated the Governor’s 

submittal of these SIP revisions and 

have determined that the State met the 

requirements for reasonable notice and 

public hearing under section 110(a)(2) 

of the CAA. As required by section 

110(k)(1)(B) of the CAA, we reviewed 

these SIP materials for conformance 

with the completeness criteria in 40 

CFR 51, Appendix V and determined 

that the submittals were 

administratively and technically 

complete. 

IV. EPA’s Review of the State of Utah’s 

November 11 and November 25, 2005 

Submittals 

1. Changes to the Definition of Volatile 

Organic Compounds 

Utah’s revision to the definition of 

VOC in Rule R307–101–2 incorporates 

by reference federal regulation 40 CFR 

51.100(s)(1) as updated by EPA on 

November 29, 2004 (69 FR 69290). This 

revision to the Utah SIP is, therefore, 

approvable. 

2. Changes to the Definition of the 

Clearing Index 

Utah’s revised definition of the 

Clearing Index in Rule R307–101–2 

reflects technological advances 

implemented by the National Weather 

Service (NWS). The value of the clearing 

index forecast provided by NWS is used 

to foresee the degree to which an area’s 

air quality would be degraded by open 

burning operations or by industrial 

processes. In the 1970s the NWS began 

forecasting a daily clearing index for 

three air basins in the State of Utah. 

New technology, implemented in recent 

years, has allowed the NWS to upgrade 

its clearing index forecast to a three-day 

forecast for any point in the State 

instead of the previous three air basins. 

The NWS clearing index forecast is 

accessible online at no cost, through an 

interface on the NWS Web site. Based 

on the above, we have concluded the 

revised definition of the Clearing Index 

is approvable. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is approving, through direct final 

rulemaking, revisions to the definitions 

of VOC and of the Clearing Index in 

Utah’s rule R307–101–2. 

Section 110(l) of the CAA states that 

a SIP revision cannot be approved if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress towards attainment of a 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES_1
55286 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

NAAQS or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. The revised 

definitions of VOCs and of the Clearing 

Index will not interfere with attainment, 

reasonable further progress, or any other 

applicable requirement of the CAA. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of today’s Federal 

Register publication, EPA is publishing 

a separate document that will serve as 

the proposal to approve the SIP revision 

if adverse comments are filed. This rule 

will be effective November 21, 2006 

without further notice unless the 

Agency receives adverse comments by 

October 23, 2006. If the EPA receives 

adverse comments, EPA will publish a 

timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

rule will not take effect. EPA will 

address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. The EPA will not 

institute a second comment period on 

this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting must do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

rule approves pre-existing requirements 

under state law and does not impose 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by state law, it does not 

contain any unfunded mandate or 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Public Law 104–4). 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have Federalism 

implications because it does not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

approves a state rule implementing a 

Federal standard, and does not alter the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

Clean Air Act. This rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it is not economically 

significant. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 

absence of a prior existing requirement 

for the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. This rule does 

not impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under 

section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by November 21, 2006. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: September 1, 2006. 

Kerrigan G. Clough, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended to read as 

follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart TT—Utah 

■ 2. Section 52.2320 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (c)(63) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2320 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(63) Revisions to the definition of 

‘‘Volatile Organic Compounds,’’ in UAC 

rule R307–101–2, as submitted by the 

Governor on November 11, 2005. 

Revisions to the definition of ‘‘Clearing 

Index,’’ in UAC rule R307–101–2, as 

submitted by the Governor on 

November 23, 2005. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Utah Administrative Code rule 

R307–101–2, as adopted by the Utah Air 

Quality Board on July 6, 2005, effective 

on July 7, 2005. This incorporation by 

reference extends only to the definition 

of Volatile Organic Compounds and 

excludes any other provisions that 

R307–101–02 incorporates by reference. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES_1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 55287 

(B) Utah Administrative Code rule 

R307–101–2, as adopted by the Utah Air 

Quality Board on September 7, 2005, 

effective on September 8, 2005. This 

incorporation by reference extends only 

to the definition of the Clearing Index 

and excludes any other provisions that 

R307–101–2 incorporates by reference. 

[FR Doc. 06–7954 Filed 9–21–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0543; FRL–8217–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Wisconsin 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to 

the Wisconsin State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for ozone. In these revisions, 

the State has incorporated changes EPA 

made to its definition of volatile organic 

compound (VOC) and its VOC control 

requirements for yeast manufacturing. 

As a result of EPA’s approval, five 

chemical compounds will no longer be 

considered VOCs. The changes to VOC 

control requirements match the EPA 

maximum achievable control 

technology (MACT) limits for yeast 

manufacturers. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective November 21, 2006, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

October 23, 2006. If adverse comments 

are received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–

OAR–2006–0543, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

• Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, 

Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR–

18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Regional 

Office’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2006–

0543. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information, 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information that 

you consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means that EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

e-mail address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD-ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional instructions 

on submitting comments, go to 

Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This Facility is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. We recommend that you 

telephone Matt Rau, Environmental 

Engineer, at (312) 886–6524 before 

visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt 

Rau, Environmental Engineer, Criteria 

Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), EPA Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6524, 

rau.matthew@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My 

Comments for EPA? 

II. What Is EPA Approving? 

III. What Is the Background for This Action? 

IV. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the State 

Submission? 

V. What Are the Environmental Effects of 

This Action? 

VI. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. 

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES_1